<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Oct 2026 11:46:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2024-53090 — afs: Fix lock recursion</title>
      <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2024-53090</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;afs: Fix lock recursion&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;afs_wake_up_async_call() can incur lock recursion.  The problem is that it
is called from AF_RXRPC whilst holding the -&amp;gt;notify_lock, but it tries to
take a ref on the afs_call struct in order to pass it to a work queue - but
if the afs_call is already queued, we then have an extraneous ref that must
be put... calling afs_put_call() may call back down into AF_RXRPC through
rxrpc_kernel_shutdown_call(), however, which might try taking the
-&amp;gt;notify_lock again.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This case isn&amp;#39;t very common, however, so defer it to a workqueue.  The oops
looks something like:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#0, krxrpcio/7001/1646
   lock: 0xffff888141399b30, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: krxrpcio/7001/1646, .owner_cpu: 0
  CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 1646 Comm: krxrpcio/7001 Not tainted 6.12.0-rc2-build3+ #4351
  Hardware name: ASUS All Series/H97-PLUS, BIOS 2306 10/09/2014
  Call Trace:
   &amp;lt;TASK&amp;gt;
   dump_stack_lvl+0x47/0x70
   do_raw_spin_lock+0x3c/0x90
   rxrpc_kernel_shutdown_call+0x83/0xb0
   afs_put_call+0xd7/0x180
   rxrpc_notify_socket+0xa0/0x190
   rxrpc_input_split_jumbo+0x198/0x1d0
   rxrpc_input_data+0x14b/0x1e0
   ? rxrpc_input_call_packet+0xc2/0x1f0
   rxrpc_input_call_event+0xad/0x6b0
   rxrpc_input_packet_on_conn+0x1e1/0x210
   rxrpc_input_packet+0x3f2/0x4d0
   rxrpc_io_thread+0x243/0x410
   ? __pfx_rxrpc_io_thread+0x10/0x10
   kthread+0xcf/0xe0
   ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10
   ret_from_fork+0x24/0x40…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;afs: Fix lock recursion&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;afs_wake_up_async_call() can incur lock recursion.  The problem is that it
is called from AF_RXRPC whilst holding the -&amp;gt;notify_lock, but it tries to
take a ref on the afs_call struct in order to pass it to a work queue - but
if the afs_call is already queued, we then have an extraneous ref that must
be put... calling afs_put_call() may call back down into AF_RXRPC through
rxrpc_kernel_shutdown_call(), however, which might try taking the
-&amp;gt;notify_lock again.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This case isn&amp;#39;t very common, however, so defer it to a workqueue.  The oops
looks something like:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#0, krxrpcio/7001/1646
   lock: 0xffff888141399b30, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: krxrpcio/7001/1646, .owner_cpu: 0
  CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 1646 Comm: krxrpcio/7001 Not tainted 6.12.0-rc2-build3+ #4351
  Hardware name: ASUS All Series/H97-PLUS, BIOS 2306 10/09/2014
  Call Trace:
   &amp;lt;TASK&amp;gt;
   dump_stack_lvl+0x47/0x70
   do_raw_spin_lock+0x3c/0x90
   rxrpc_kernel_shutdown_call+0x83/0xb0
   afs_put_call+0xd7/0x180
   rxrpc_notify_socket+0xa0/0x190
   rxrpc_input_split_jumbo+0x198/0x1d0
   rxrpc_input_data+0x14b/0x1e0
   ? rxrpc_input_call_packet+0xc2/0x1f0
   rxrpc_input_call_event+0xad/0x6b0
   rxrpc_input_packet_on_conn+0x1e1/0x210
   rxrpc_input_packet+0x3f2/0x4d0
   rxrpc_io_thread+0x243/0x410
   ? __pfx_rxrpc_io_thread+0x10/0x10
   kthread+0xcf/0xe0
   ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10
   ret_from_fork+0x24/0x40…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2024-53090</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
